So far these extracts from ‘What’s the matter with ‘technology enhanced learning’, sum up some of the big questions for me:

“Yet after science and technology have worked over all human limitations […] the transhumanists claim that something essentially ‘human’ will still remain: ‘reason, intelligence, self-realization, egalitarianism’.   Technology here simultaneously, and paradoxically, enables both the transcendence and the preservation of the human.”

“A critical posthumanist position on technology and education would see the human neither as dominating technology nor as being dominated by it. Rather it would see the subject of education itself as being performed through a coming together of the human and non-human, the material and the discursive. It would not see ‘enhancement’ as a feasible proposition, in that enhancement depends on maintaining a distinction between the subject/learner being enhanced and the object/technology ‘doing’ or ‘enabling’ the enhancement.”

“It is time to re-think our task as practitioners and researchers in digital education, not viewing ourselves as the brokers of ‘transformation’, or ‘harnessers’ of technological power, but rather as critical protagonists in wider debates on the new forms of education, subjectivity, society and culture worked-through by contemporary technological change.”

Sian Bayne (2015) What’s the matter with ‘technology-enhanced learning’?,
Learning, Media and Technology, 40:1, 5-20, DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2014.915851